CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT07011069Updated Sep 24, 2026

Rhomboid Intercostal and Subserratus Plane Block vs Erector Spinae Plane Block in Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery

An interventional study of ESP block group and RISS block group in Video Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery, Regional Block for Pain Control and Regional Blocks, sponsored by Bursa City Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-24.

Sponsored by Bursa City Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
93
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

To compare the rhomboid intercostal subserratus plane block with the erector spinae plane block regarding their analgesic efficacy and effects on respiratory function for patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

Read the detailed description

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) can be very painful and may lead to complications such as prolonged stays in intensive care, thromboembolic complications due to lack of early mobilization, chronic acute pain, and delirium if adequate analgesia is not provided. Therefore, using thoracic epidural, paravertebral, or regional blocks as part of multimodal analgesia is recommended to provide effective pain relief.

This study aims to compare the effects of the erector spinae plane block (ESP) and rhomboid intercostal subserratus plane block (RISS) on postoperative analgesia and the improvement of respiratory parameters in patients undergoing VATS. These two techniques may have different analgesic profiles with respect to somatic and visceral pain.

The primary objective is to evaluate the incidence of chest tube-site somatic pain at postoperative hour 2. Secondary objectives include the incidence of visceral pain, total analgesic consumption in the first 24 hours postoperatively, assessing resting and dynamic pain scores, triflow performance, complications, and length of hospital stay.

02

Conditions studied

  • Video Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery
  • Regional Block for Pain Control
  • Regional Blocks
  • Pulmonary Functions
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Bursa City Hospital is the lead sponsor of 66 studies on the registry; 31 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients who will undergo VATS
  • Who agrees to participate
  • American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I, II, and III
  • Elective surgery
  • Age between 18 and 80 years

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Local anesthetic allergy
  • Who disagrees to participate
  • ASA physical status IV and V
  • Emergency surgery
  • Hemorrhagic disease
  • Thoracic vertebrae deformity
  • Thoracic vertebrae surgery
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
93 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Patients who received ESP block

    Those who received the erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain management

    Procedure: ESP block group

  • Active comparator
    Patients who received RISS block

    Those who received the rhomboid intercostal subserratus plane block for postoperative pain management

    Procedure: RISS block group

Interventions

  • ProcedureESP block group

    ESP blocks are performed for patients undergoing VATS.

  • ProcedureRISS block group

    RISS blocks are performed for patients undergoing VATS.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Incidence of chest tube-site somatic pain

    Proportion of participants with localized pain at the chest tube insertion site, elicited by palpation or chest tube manipulation. Somatic pain was recorded as present or absent.

    Time frame: At postoperative hour 2

Secondary outcomes

  1. Dynamic pain score

    Postoperative pain scores during coughing and deep breathing are measured on a 11 cm scale, where "0" indicates no pain and "10" indicates the worst pain ever.

    Time frame: Postoperative first 24 hours.

  2. Opioid consumption

    Total opioid consumption within the first 24 hours in the postoperative period.

    Time frame: Postoperative first 24 hours.

  3. Resting pain score

    Postoperative pain scores during rest are measured on a 11 cm scale, where "0" indicates no pain and "10" indicates the worst pain ever.

    Time frame: Postoperative first 24 hours.

  4. Pulmonary functions

    Pulmonary functions are assessed using Triflow performance. Postoperative Triflow numbers (whether 1, 2, or 3 balls can be raised) for the patients are recorded.

    Time frame: Postoperative first 24 hours.

  5. Complications

    Complications regarding regional blocks and surgery (such as hematoma, pulmonary complications) are recorded.

    Time frame: From block administration to hospital discharge.

  6. Hospital stay time

    The length of hospital stay is recorded.

    Time frame: From surgery to hospital discharge.

  7. Incidence of visceral pain

    Proportion of participants reporting deep, poorly localized intrathoracic pain not confined to the incision or chest tube insertion site. Pain was recorded as present or absent.

    Time frame: At postoperative hour 2

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University of Health Sciences, Bursa City Hospital
    Bursa, Nilufer 16110, Turkey (Türkiye)
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Forero M, Rajarathinam M, Adhikary S, Chin KJ. Erector spinae plane (ESP) block in the management of post thoracotomy pain syndrome: A case series. Scand J Pain. 2017 Oct;17:325-329. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2017.08.013. Epub 2017 Sep 12. PubMed 28919152 ↗
  • Elsharkawy H, Maniker R, Bolash R, Kalasbail P, Drake RL, Elkassabany N. Rhomboid Intercostal and Subserratus Plane Block: A Cadaveric and Clinical Evaluation. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018 Oct;43(7):745-751. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000824. PubMed 30169476 ↗
  • Hsieh MJ, Wang KC, Liu HP, Gonzalez-Rivas D, Wu CY, Liu YH, Wu YC, Chao YK, Wu CF. Management of acute postoperative pain with continuous intercostal nerve block after single port video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic resection. J Thorac Dis. 2016 Dec;8(12):3563-3571. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2016.12.30. PubMed 28149550 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — The data sets used in this research may be made available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 24, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07011069
Lead sponsor
Bursa City Hospital
Responsible party
Hande Gurbuz (Assoc. Prof., MD, PhD, Bursa City Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 8, 2025
Start date
Jun 9, 2025
Primary completion
Dec 4, 2025
Completion
Dec 15, 2025
Last update
Sep 24, 2026

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion